Larry A. Redmon, Jason J. Cleere, and Gerald W.Evers

We established a grazing trial during late summer of 2003 to investigate economic benefits and impacts on livestock performance using stockpiled bermudagrass + ryegrass (B+R) versus hay (H) for wintering beef cows. A ‘Coastal' bermudagrass field was grazed to a 7.6-cm stubble height during late August and fertilized with 56 kg N ha-1. The field was deferred from grazing until 2 Dec when cattle in the B+R group began grazing stockpiled bermudagrass, while the H group began receiving hay. At grazing initiation, accumulated bermudagrass herbage mass was 3422 kg DM ha-1 and initial forage nutritive value analysis indicated an average crude protein (CP) concentration of 11.2%. By 5 Jan. 2004, CP values had only declined to approximately 9%. On 5 Mar. 2004, B+R cows began grazing ryegrass. Ryegrass CP levels during March and April averaged >20%.

Body condition scores (BCS) of treatment cattle were obtained every 30 days for six months. Except for the 5th BCS measuring period (1 Apr. 2004), there were no differences (P<0.05) in BCS between treatment groups, and in all cases BCS remained above 5.0. Thus, there appeared to be no adverse effects on cattle grazing the stockpiled bermudagrass and annual ryegrass compared with cattle that were fed hay.

Preliminary first year data (2003-2004) indicated a savings of $63 per cow during the winter feeding period in favor of the B+R system compared with the H system. This figure does not include the savings associated with reduced labor in the B+R system. The implications of the preliminary data suggest there could be dramatic economic benefits realized by southeastern US cow-calf producers. Additional data, however, are needed before recommendations can be made with complete confidence.